What is the difference between unitive justice and restorative justice?

from Sylvia Clute's entry in Genuine Justice:

When you are providing restorative justice services to a criminal court, the way the court defines the problem, i.e., who broke the law, makes identifying the offender easy. But if you stop there, you fail to give context its due consideration. While context does not dictate personal choice, it certainly impacts it. A boy who grows up surrounded by drug dealers is far more likely to see that as a career option than a boy who has no drug dealers in his neighborhood.

Moreover, when you broaden the lens and include more about context, who the offender is depends on which moment in time you are referring to, and from which perspective you choose to look. In the larger scheme of things, there is no easily defined line that can be drawn between offenders and victims, as it is a muddled mix of choices made in the past, and in real time and embedded in the future game plan.

When we give equal weight to individual choice and context, we see that the choice to harm another usually signifies underlying brokenness screaming to be dealt with. If we stop with holding the offender accountable, and thus only consider the offender’s choice, the underlying brokenness too often goes unaddressed. If, on the other hand, we heal the underlying brokenness, harmful acts will far less common.

When harm has occurred, healing the underlying brokenness is the goal of unitive justice. It sees the harm not as a problem to be solved but as an opportunity for personal growth, healing relationships and creating a stronger community, the result that is achieved when underlying brokenness is healed.

Even the restorative processes that see the goal as holding the offender accountable often address the underlying brokenness, not by design, but because so many of the barriers to doing so that exist in the criminal courts have been removed. This permits information about context to emerge and be considered along with individual choice. It then becomes apparent that the underlying brokenness is the root cause that must be healed if people are to be safe.

So why not make healing the underlying brokenness the goal? This eliminates the problem that arises when several people in the circle believe they are the victims of the people sitting across from them, while those across from them see themselves as the victims of their accusers. The restorative processes that see the goal as healing the underlying brokenness that is reflected in this us-versus-them scenario are likely to be consistent with unitive justice.